Posted on 01/13/2003 6:31:26 PM PST by trick question
The widely promoted claim that Americans are not required to pay income taxes on their wages is false, a federal judge ruled Friday in ordering one of its leading proponents to stop inciting tax evasion.
The judge, Christopher C. Conner, ordered the proponent, Thurston Paul Bell of Hanover, Pa., to post the court's order at his Web site (www.nite.org). Mr. Bell was also ordered to remove all language promoting the claim, known as the 861 position after a section of the tax code, that only those working for foreign-owned companies owe taxes on their wages.
Mr. Bell must turn over to the Justice Department copies of his client's tax returns, notify them that their returns were false and notify them that in addition to owing taxes they may face penalties for filing frivolous returns. Any refunds they obtained were erroneous, Judge Conner said, and the Internal Revenue Service may take them back.
Mr. Bell did not respond to e-mail and a fax seeking comment.
The preliminary injunction is the most serious blow to what members call the tax honesty movement, which has gained thousands of followers in the last two years, largely through full-page advertisements in USA Today. Members call the federal government a criminal organization.
The 861 position is nonsense, ruled Judge Conner of United States District Court for the Middle District of Pennsylvania. At least a dozen other courts have taken the same position, but that has not stopped people from paying at least $1,000 to Mr. Bell and others who claim that they have found a way to legally stop paying taxes.
Judge Conner noted that Mr. Bell conceded that Section 861 specified that wages earned in the United States were taxable.
Mr. Bell said, however, that the regulations implementing the law exempted wages paid by domestic companies from being taxed. Judge Conner said this false claim "rests purely on semantics and takes the regulations under Section 861 out of context."
Mr. Bell told the judge last year that he had a First Amendment right to promote his political views.
Judge Conner held Friday that Mr. Bell was running a business that incited people to violate the law, that his Web site was an advertisement for illegal advice and that he was engaged in commercial, not political, speech.
"Although the First Amendment protects commercial speech generally, it does not protect false commercial speech," Judge Conner wrote in rejecting Mr. Bell's First Amendment argument.
Businessmen have reportedly boasted of not paying taxes based on the 861 position. They said that the Internal Revenue Service knew that some of them had not paid taxes for two decades, but had done nothing, which they took as confirmation of their belief that the tax laws were a hoax. None of those businessmen have been indicted and some of them say the I.R.S. still has not contacted them.
We the People, an organization in Queensbury, N.Y., which has promoted the 861 position, has urged all Americans to stop paying taxes because federal officials will not meet with them to explain what authority the government has to impose taxes. Not paying taxes is the "one non-violent option left" to tyranny, according to the group.
Why should I have to pay a higher rate than the non-producers?
Because congress has the authority to do that under the Constitution.
Why should one man be levied a duty on alcoholic beverages just because he drinks them, and another not have to pay the tax just because he doesn't drink them.
Equal "protection" of the law, does not mean equal outcome with no regard to circumstance.
yep.
Yeah... and stare decisis no longer applies, when judges and activist lawyers- like you- decide to follow an activist viewpoint, rather than the law as decided before you were born...
And the absolute ARROGANCE to say lawyers and judges determine the law??? Lawyers are supposed to argue the merits of the law as it applies to their clients, and judges determine whether those arguments have merit. If you truly believe what you stated above, you truly are a parasite on society...
Ever wonder why people look at the legal system with such contempt???? A system which, I might add, is so blatant in that it doesn't give a rats @ss about justice- as demonstrated by lawyers like YOU?
You have demonstrated that you're part of that system, AND part of the problem.
I hope that sits well with you... A profession without integrity or honor... Well, if you don't become a judge, maybe you'll be a politician, since it's all the same to you...
There is no way possible, to sufficiently express my absolute contempt for you.
Coming from a lawyer??? Gee, I don't what to say... except THANKS!!!!!
Too bad you're too blinded by (pick any or all)
1. Greed
2. Unbridled arrogance
3. Your values being for sale to the highest bidder
4. Believing in "situational" ethics
Oh yeah, you're just the one to talk about "nonsense" for cash. Why don't you just admit you're a prostitute??? At least for the "ladies of the evening," they don't have such pretentions as you...
Like I said, words fail to describe what a contemptible, sorry piece of work you truly are....
You make the law...
Unfortunately there seems to more than enough people out there ready and willing to push these scams and tell everyone they can have their fantasy just by buying a book here, a video there, and filing and saying magic words.
Too bad it doesn't work that way.
United States v. Sloan, 939 F.2d 499 (7th Cir. 1991)
Argued that there is no law imposing a tax on income, that state citizens are exempt from income tax.
KANNE, Circuit Judge.
- Like moths to a flame, some people find themselves irresistibly drawn to the tax protestor movement's illusory claim that there is no legal requirement to pay federal income tax. And, like the moths, these people sometimes get burned. Lorin G. Sloan believed these claims and because he acted upon them now faces four months in a federal prison; there can be little doubt that he has been burned.
- The real tragedy of this case is the unconscionable waste of Mr. Sloan's time, resources, and emotion in continuing to pursue these wholly defective and unsuccessful arguments about the validity of the income tax laws of the United States. Despite our rejection of Mr. Sloan's legal analysis of the tax laws, we are not unmindful of the sincerity of his beliefs. On the other hand, we are less sure of the sincerity of the professional tax protestors who promote their views in literature and meetings to persons like Mr. Sloan, yet are unlikely ever to face the type of penalties incurred by him. It may be that our decision will not alter Mr. Sloan's views regarding the tax laws of this country, for he has stated that if we affirm his conviction without applying the law as he understands it, our decision will be "a sham to which I WILL NOT SUBMIT." It may also be that serving his sentence in prison will not alter Mr. Sloan's view. We hope this pessimistic assessment is incorrect.
- We AFFIRM the conviction of Lorin G. Sloan on all counts.
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!!!!!!!!!
Let's talk about irresponsible lawyers, for a second, shall we????
HMOs are the logical response to ambulance-chasing lawyers.
Frivolous lawsuits are the norm (McDonalds coffee temperature, attacking tobacco companies and the Americans with Disabilities Act lawsuits, just to name a few)
It's now common knowledge that lawyers are about money not justice or "laws" or anything else.
Stated simply, you're a whore.
For the record, I do pay taxes- because the risks involved with following the law, versus what the courts selectively enforce- is simply too great. Unfortunately, I have to "play the game."
That you espouse lies, is little surprise to me- after all, you are a lawyer. But don't you dare aspire to some sense of nobility, when your "profession" is based on disengenuous tactics and greed... A prostitute is more respectable, since they have no such pretentions.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.